Re: GRs, irrelevant amendments, and insincere voting
On Sat, 1 Nov 2003 22:44:30 -0500, Branden Robinson <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> My thesis, as I unfortunately and apparently failed to make clear in
> the original post, is that, given that we view as desirable the
> practice of ranking one's ballot preferences sincerely, that there
> is a procedural mechanism for subverting that desirable property.
There is a mechanism for a minority to block a proposal,
otherwise known as rough consensus.
> What I *attempted* to solicit commentary on was "what can we do
> about this?"
> The ferocity of some people's replies to my messages tells me that
> some people feel the answer is "nothing", and that I should either
> shut up about it because it will never happen, or possibly because
> it's a technique some folks were looking forward to using. :)
Ah yes, them dastardly conservatives is now attempting to
drown noble discussion by underhanded tactics, but nothing is hidden
from Branden!! We now KNOW itis because they wanna use such
underhanded tactics to have their own nefarious way!! But they have
been discovered!! The great branden uncovers it all!!!!!!
> I raise that only for the sake of being thorough, though. That's
> not a practical fear, as long before an infinite number of votes are
> held ( :) ), the Project would rebel against it in some way.
> Probably by amending the Constitution or abandoning the SRD
> temporarily or permanently while the system is reformed.
Oh yeah!! the dastardly conservatives shall not prevail!! come
the revolution, we shall abandon the SRD!!!
> I hope the above helps.
When you are ready for a level debate without calling the
opposition names, come back here.
MEETS QUALITY STANDARDS: ours, not yours.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C